Skip to main content

View Diary: Part of Texas anti-abortion law doesn't go into effect thanks to judge's ruling (17 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  How could this Judge (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SouthernLeveller, tekno2600, Ahianne

    not rule that an abortion after 20 weeks is not allowed?  That is certainly in conflict with the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Trimester ruling in Roe v. Wade.

    •  As the diary noted, (6+ / 0-)

      the plaintiffs did not challenge the 20-week provision, so the judge couldn't rule on it.  I don't know why it was not challenged, but possibly there were tactical reasons (such as the absence of a plaintiff beyond the 20-week cutoff). On the merits of the issue, the Supreme Court long ago disavowed what it termed the overly "rigid" three-trimester system of Roe.  The most significant fact now is viability.  In the 1989 Webster case, the Court upheld a Missouri law requiring that physicians,  prior to performing an abortion on pregnancies 20 weeks or more, perform "such medical examinations and tests as are necessary to make a finding of [the fetus'] gestational age, weight and lung maturity," in order to assess viability.  If the Texas law is an absolute ban, it would seem that it would be hard to defend; if it only puts some restictions on such procedures, Webster  indicates that they would be upheld unless they amounted to what the Court would regard as an "undue burden."

      The prevailing court cases only serve to emphasize the importance of electing legislators and governors who do not see their mission as throwing up one roadblock after another in a quest to find the limits of the "undue burden" standard.  So -- go Wendy!

      There is no distinctly native American criminal class except Congress. -- Mark Twain

      by southriver on Tue Oct 29, 2013 at 02:01:25 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  They can still file additional challenges later. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Eric Nelson, Ahianne

        The plantiffs chose to only raise specific issues on which they thought they had the greatest chance of winning initially. The viability argument is long and complex. Since, other states are looking at similar bans they may be waiting to see if it is challenged there first.

        Just doing my part to piss off right wing nuts, one smart ass comment at a time.

        by tekno2600 on Tue Oct 29, 2013 at 04:49:45 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yep, the 9th circuit has ruled on the 20 week.. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          ..ban as unconstitutional .

          On Tuesday, judges on the US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals struck down an Arizona law that would have banned abortions at 20 weeks. The judges called the law "unconstitutional under an unbroken stream of Supreme Court authority."
          From what I understand listening to some discussion on MSNBC The Texas case was carefully structured as to avoid putting 5th circuit at odds with the 9th court. That could bump it up to the supreme court.

          If that happens 'viabilty' could likely be considered. Roe v wade could be vulnerable from todays right wing supreme court.

          So for now-  good news

          Thx Laura Clawsen

          •  Interesting. That's a bit deep in the weeds for me (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Eric Nelson

            I'll have to wait for someone with a weed whacker to come along and explain how all this plays out.

            Just doing my part to piss off right wing nuts, one smart ass comment at a time.

            by tekno2600 on Wed Oct 30, 2013 at 06:19:20 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site